When I was a kid, “AI” was quake 2 bots, starcraft pathfinding algorithms, and chessbot personalities.
I dont understand why the old definition of AI keeps being retconned.
I dont understand why the old definition of AI keeps being retconned.
There was never any old definition AI that limited it to such a tiny set of capabilities.
AI is controversial because the term intelligent is controversial and covers so much.
The term "AI" never meant bots in general.
It's true that in games bots were also called AI but only in a specific context and niche, and it is not what the whole conversation is about.
Intelligence is usually defined as the skill in pursuing a goal, or speed of acquiring the ability for pursuing given goal. Given the goal-dependent nature, it's not that useful to use the same tests and measurements for intelligence over time, be it artificial or not.
[1] Legg, S., Hutter, M.: A collection of definitions of intelligence
[2] François Chollet, On the Measure of Intelligence
Imagine if we had social media during the flip from geocentrism.
AI is pithy, and can be anything from skynet to… skynet. Or clippy, technically, but everyone seems to have forgotten about him.
FOMO drives the valuation, and the more vagueness and ambiguity you can have, the easier it is to stoke it. And if the option is being part owner of a world conquering, game changing tech - or a victim - which would you choose?
The name basically means anything a computer can do, and has meant almost anything a computer does at some point. So it's not a very useful word anyway, no loss in letting marketers use it to whatever Tormentus Nexus they are working towards.
I'm not sure why we allowed it, but they have been working on it for more than 50 years. My best guess is that they just kept insisting on it until people lost attention for an instant, and then did it again, and again.
UK an Germany practically invented the concept, and the US practically wrote the manual on how to make a welfare state.